9 comments:

Great to read this, see these classic photos of those "interesting [understatement] losers" -- thanks. We who follow our teams could all learn a 'lesson' here, The Giants, who can sometimes pitch but rarely hit this year, had scored 1 run in 3 games until, late in last night's game, they came from behind to score 4, and thus became an "interesting winner" last night. And what next?

6.3

grey whiteness of cloud against invisibleridge, robin calling from branch in leftforeground, no sound of wave in channel

meaning in which being rests, at any time is founded

presented, left out too much, previous hint of dream

grey-white cloud reflected in channel,wingspan of osprey flapping across it

I remember feeling this way about the Cubs, of whom my sister was an undying fan.

I don't know if the timing of your post is because of the Tigers' heartbreak last night, but it was nice to read this now. Funny how they were not losers of the game last night, but the loss of the perfect game feels far more important than the winning or losing of the game. Interesting losers indeed.

Now you can truly appreciate yr reach knowing that I was studying BTP while watching the perfect game unfold on local Detroit TV.

(It prompted a phone to Bruce Shlain with my "you'd better watch, Gonzo's put down 18 in a row." His reply, "Galarraga? He'll never make it.")

When the unspeakable happened, who I really wanted to call was YOU -- that seeming a bit intrusive in this shared cultural context. But see, eventually you always hold up your end of this virtual bargain.

I guess we always knew James Joyce needed a stronger prescription. Today he's behind the plate at 1pm edt.

Well, Ruth and Doowman, as you can see from the top and bottom photos, at least the Tigers had things all their own way when they were playing the Browns.

But so did everybody.

I worked as a youth at Cubs games, and so am familiar with that venerable tradition. But in that case the pleasant cozy environment of the park, the relatively pleasant urban neighborhood and above all the touching, undying loyalty of the fanbase, made things seem somehow not so bad.

@TC The Browns were not the best drawing team in history, that is true. But consider:1) The only surviving two-team cities in baseball have ballparks in geographically distinct areas of town. For their entire history, the Cards were never more than 4 blocks away. And from 1922 on were in the same exact park as the Browns! If you are going to journey to "destination A" and had your choice, would you ratehr see the winning team or the mostly-losing team?2) But St. Louis loved its Brownies as much as any city loved any team. In 1952, the Browns penultimate year, Browns attendance almost doubled while major league baseball was in its third year of a four-year steep attendance drop (and losing 1.5 million in total gate between '51 and '52, about 10%).3) If the Browns had made it into the era of night baseball, you wouldnt have seen such paltry figures. Overall baseball attendance is up 5 times from 1952, largely as a result of night games.

Walt Judnich (Browns slugger in the forties) tossed Dirty Al Gallagher (future SF Giants 3B) and me out of his San Francisco (near Seals Stadium) bar (for being underage)around 1960. Gallagher or I shouted from the street, "This ain't over." But that was about it and Judnich went back to serving cheap beer to those who didn't care that he wasn't one of Joe DiMaggio's cronies.